Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Boozer?


Recommended Posts

Boozer is terrible. He and Big Al would get in each others way offensively and defensively they'd possibly be the worst frontcourt in the league.

You gotta look past the name. He isn't a 20/10 guy anymore. He's had a great career but he's not that good anymore. I'd rather trade Henderson/Zeller/pick for Greg Monroe.

Monroe and Boozer are very similar players. Both have the capability of knocking down the 15 footer but both prefer to play just outside the paint. The difference is that we wouldn't have to shell out $10 mil for Boozer.

I also disagree that he (Boozer) is terrible. It's his contract that was terrible. He is still a 14/8 player. I can also think of plenty more front court combo's that are worse defensively than Jefferson/Boozer.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter though, being that we didn't win the amnesty bid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why the Lakers want him when they have Randle and Davis. Surely it would have been better for them to develop those guys, than bring in a guy like Boozer to take mins away from them?

If they were a contender I guess it would make some sense. But they aren't. They are more like a 30-win team at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed Davis just got f*cked over and I bet he's pretty mad. He just signed a 2y/$2mil deal with LA that has a player option for the 2nd year. Apparently he left a bit of money on the table to be a backup elsewhere because he wanted playing time. He wanted to showcase himself this year then look to get paid next summer. Now he's gonna be buried in the bench behind Boozer/Hill/Randle.

He's put up great numbers when he actually gets a chance to play. He's just spent most his career on teams with great big men (Randolph/Gasol/Bosh).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ed Davis just got f*cked over and I bet he's pretty mad. He just signed a 2y/$2mil deal with LA that has a player option for the 2nd year. Apparently he left a bit of money on the table to be a backup elsewhere because he wanted playing time. He wanted to showcase himself this year then look to get paid next summer. Now he's gonna be buried in the bench behind Boozer/Hill/Randle.

He's put up great numbers when he actually gets a chance to play. He's just spent most his career on teams with great big men (Randolph/Gasol/Bosh).

Can't/doesn't Hill play at center?

They seem pretty thin at center outside of him and Sacre. So I assume Hill will play at center.

Granted that still leaves Davis behind Randle and Boozer, but he should see some mins [albeit limited].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah, Darnold is basically a really high level game manager. Put him on a good team where he isn't required to provide lift and he can shine. But when you need him to do the franchise QB thing and put the team in his back here comes the INTs. He just doesn't seem to have any positions on his dial between "super conservative take whatever's there and take care of the ball" and "YOLO!!! There's a receiver down there somewhere in that sea of defenders!"
    • See, it's posts like this that show me how many of you are taking my post as an anti Dowdle post and saying he didn't have a good game, but that's the furthest thing from my intention and what I'm trying to say. Because that's the comparison you're making with Bryce, it's adding or removing a small handful of plays from their stats and saying "this is the game they could have had instead" I'm literally only talking about the play calling from the game, it's literally in the title of the thread, that we still have play calling problems. I'm saying that people are going to get stuck on the 200 yard rushing game by a player and extrapolate that to "well Canales must have called a good game" and I'm trying to say not to fall for that mirage. Because 6 big runs do not make for a well called game when we had over 60 snaps. Even beyond that, if you add in the two 20+ yard catches from T-Mac and the one XL had, and you're looking at 9 of over 60 snaps that accounted for close to 60% of our yards in the game. That's a few big plays covering up for coaching deficiencies, that's NOT a well called 60 minutes of football. Had he had the 200 yards because Canales' play calling was keeping the defense on their heels, not knowing what we were doing next, and Dowdle was ripping of 8-12 yard runs on a consistent basis, then yea, that would be something to be excited about with Canales finally calling a good game for a change. Our offense is predictable and the play design is basic, there is nothing I've seen out of Canales' offense that says he's able to scheme and call plays to outsmart the defense, which is something all the elite offensive coaches are able to do in this day and age.
    • Dante Moore is the top pick in a couple of mock drafts now. 
×
×
  • Create New...